Why is someone experienced considered less motivated/driven? Surely an unfounded biased assumption? Desire to put in hours? Surely you mean less inclined to accept exploitation of the worker?
> -low cost
You get what you pay for, pay peanuts: get monkeys.
> -flexibility
I'm over 40 and use my spare time to learn new things. Have worked for companies stuck on the same old, same old tech for 10+ years, it's why I have to learn the new stuff in my own time.
> -creativity/fresh ideas
Why the assumption that this automatically trumps experince? And who is to say that either new ideas have value simply because they are new or that experienced people cannot have new ideas?
> -more likely to bond with other young employees, and participate in company culture (instead of having a family they need to spend time with).
Absolute tosh. Again, you're assuming something rather silly that can be turned around to say "young employees struggle to bond with older employees and are more likely to be out on the tiles every night, staying up late watching reality TV (instead of being well rested and able to concentrate).
> To me, it basically means that for basic software engineering, at a certain point you actually do (on average) become less valuable as you age, unless you move up into system architecture, specialism/subject matter expertise, or management.
Absolute twaddle. A cursory glance back through history will show many people reach their greatest heights as they become older. Mathematicians, coders, authors, politicians, whatever their chosen career, there's an endless list of people who contributed something worthwhile after they turned 30. Perhaps you are the one who isn't connecting, who can't see the forest for the trees?
You seem to have taken this post very personally instead of analytically. I suggested some reasons that would explain why companies that hire younger tend to be beating companies that hire older, i.e. that there clearly is an economic advantage. What's your explanation for the phenomenon?
The secondary point I've brought up on this thread is that private employment discrimination is "absolute twaddle" to regulate in the first place, because it introduces the concept of a thought crime, which is quite Orwellian. That is, the employment decision (the action) is only a crime contingent on what the "perpetrator" was thinking while making the decision. This is completely different than normal laws, where the action is unequivocally a crime and it's a matter of whether it was committed by the defendant, with state of mind only taken into account as to alter the severity of the sentence. Even "conspiracy to commit" laws are in reference to actions which are crimes in and of themselves.
Why is someone experienced considered less motivated/driven? Surely an unfounded biased assumption? Desire to put in hours? Surely you mean less inclined to accept exploitation of the worker?
> -low cost
You get what you pay for, pay peanuts: get monkeys.
> -flexibility
I'm over 40 and use my spare time to learn new things. Have worked for companies stuck on the same old, same old tech for 10+ years, it's why I have to learn the new stuff in my own time.
> -creativity/fresh ideas
Why the assumption that this automatically trumps experince? And who is to say that either new ideas have value simply because they are new or that experienced people cannot have new ideas?
> -more likely to bond with other young employees, and participate in company culture (instead of having a family they need to spend time with).
Absolute tosh. Again, you're assuming something rather silly that can be turned around to say "young employees struggle to bond with older employees and are more likely to be out on the tiles every night, staying up late watching reality TV (instead of being well rested and able to concentrate).
> To me, it basically means that for basic software engineering, at a certain point you actually do (on average) become less valuable as you age, unless you move up into system architecture, specialism/subject matter expertise, or management.
Absolute twaddle. A cursory glance back through history will show many people reach their greatest heights as they become older. Mathematicians, coders, authors, politicians, whatever their chosen career, there's an endless list of people who contributed something worthwhile after they turned 30. Perhaps you are the one who isn't connecting, who can't see the forest for the trees?